Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

F-35C passed the Critical Design Review

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
propsarebest said:
WRONG WRONG WRONG! Ya got it all wrong shipwreck!


The fact that the B2 (or the BUFF or the BONE for that matter) has flown from the CONUS to various bad parts of the world to drop JDAMs never happened???
Click to expand...

I'm talkin' true 'Global Stike'.

AF global strike capability may look good on PowerPoint at the Pentagon, but it is the Navy that has the actual capability to execute. While a B-2 driver is RTB and on his second piddle pack, SIG600 and his buddies have already landed and rearmed for the next dmpi’s. Being 300 nm from the target is good.

Plus, a CVN doesn’t have to worry about basing rights. True 'Global Stike' is all about location, location, location.
 
propsarebest said:
WRONG WRONG WRONG! Ya got it all wrong shipwreck!


The fact that the B2 (or the BUFF or the BONE for that matter) has flown from the CONUS to various bad parts of the world to drop JDAMs never happened???
Click to expand...

The AF boyz get medals and ascots to do those missions...

The Naval Aviators get.......to do it all over again...cause they can...
 
DaveGriffin said:
You sound jealous Scrap Dog.

It is interesting to note that the AF is back to its old ways again. The recent comment by Gen. Keys complaining about using $50 MM dollar airplanes to look for $1K IEDs is typical of the AF culture. He wasn’t even hiding the fact that the AF doesn’t believe it belongs in a support role in COIN. The thought of a highly trained AF pilot in the world’s most advanced fighter, called in by a lowly squad of grunts on patrol, to look at a suspected IED placement, and then not even getting the chance to drop a bomb, is just too much for AF fighter jocks to deal with.

Now get back in your F-16, fire up the FLIR pod and run a few more IED patrols.
Click to expand...


Dave... you fooking moron... it's Navy Prowlers that are doing most of the EM jamming for IEDs (thats now unclass and CNN has done a full expose') and Navy and Marine Hornets running our FLIR's looking for stuff. Why don't you do us all a favor and shut the fvck up. Propsarebest, you're just as dumb with the statements you make.

Disclaimer, Dave is in no way representative of Naval Aviators actually wearing wings. He needs to curl up and die. Homo.
 
Last edited:
SIG600 said:
Dave... you fooking moron... it's Navy Prowlers that are doing most of the EM jamming for IEDs (thats now unclass and CNN has done a full expose') and Navy and Marine Hornets running our FLIR's looking for stuff. Why don't you do us all a favor and shut the fvck up. Propsarebest, you're just as dumb with the statements you make.

Disclaimer, Dave is in no way representative of Naval Aviators actually wearing wings. He needs to curl up and die. Homo.
Click to expand...

SIG600,

Sure, it’s the Navy and Marine Prowlers, Hornets and Harriers that are helping out their bros on the ground with the IEDs. That’s because the AF thinks it is unglamorous and unproductive work and doesn’t want to send its airplanes and pilots to help.

Since he bad guys always lose gunfights with the good guys, they have given up on direct action engagement and are essentially fighting the war with IEDs. Even though 75% of our casualties are the result of IEDs, not AK-47s or RPGs, the AF still doesn’t like the idea of committing its assets to help the grunts find an IED before it hurts someone.

A few weeks back here in Va Beach, Gen Keys, USAF, Commander, Air Combat Command gave a keynote address at the Transformation Warfare 07 conference, sponsored by the US Naval Institute. Gen Keys stated that using UAVs and airplanes with FLIR to find IEDs is a misuse of time and AF resources.

He is not interested in having his guys on call to ground commanders to help them evaluate suspect IED sites. He said it was a junkyard on the ground and the number of false positives was too high and he didn’t think the ground guys always needed the full motion video feeds they often requested.

The General said that ACC proposes another solution to IEDs. He wants an air centric concept of deployment. He wants the AF to go after the IED network, not the device after it is buried. That means he wants to drop bombs on the bad guys' support network prior to setting the IEDs, and not help our guys find the devices after they are set. While that is a good strategy, what went unstated was that under the new COIN doctrine, that is exactly what our ground troops are tasked. Under COIN the AF has been assigned a primarily support role.

Gen. Keys comments and ideas are typical of the AF mindset. Helping grunts if they find a suspected IED site isn’t sexy because the grunt ground commander is running the show and using the AF only for support. And the AF doesn’t get to make headlines and drop bombs.
 
Last edited:
Jeez...FOUR months of not looking at FI and I come back to what? The first thing I see is "F-35" and "Dave Griffin" in the same line. Open the thread and see that nothing has changed.

DG still doesn't know anything about flying airplanes and Navy guys are still disavowing him.

FYI, Dave, there is not a SINGLE USAF pilot who thinks supporting troops on the ground is "beneath" him, and I'm stunned that you misinterpreted Key's remarks. Your expectation bias is showing, and I firmly believe you are being willfully ignorant.

And, Dave, before you squawk about the F-35 and CAS, it might help if you actually wait until the F-35 IOT&E is finished and it's IOC. You actually might be surprised at what you see. Or you can stick your fingers in your ears and chant "Warthog, Warthog, Warthog" til you pass out. Of course, it'll be all those ex-Hog drivers in the F-35, but what do THEY know about CAS, huh?
 
DaveGriffin said:
SIG600,

Sure, it’s the Navy and Marine Prowlers, Hornets and Harriers that are helping out their bros on the ground with the IEDs. That’s because the AF thinks it is unglamorous and unproductive work and doesn’t want to send its airplanes and pilots to help.

Since he bad guys always lose gunfights with the good guys, they have given up on direct action engagement and are essentially fighting the war with IEDs. Even though 75% of our casualties are the result of IEDs, not AK-47s or RPGs, the AF still doesn’t like the idea of committing its assets to help the grunts find an IED before it hurts someone.

A few weeks back here in Va Beach, Gen Keys, USAF, Commander, Air Combat Command gave a keynote address at the Transformation Warfare 07 conference, sponsored by the US Naval Institute. Gen Keys stated that using UAVs and airplanes with FLIR to find IEDs is a misuse of time and AF resources.

He is not interested in having his guys on call to ground commanders to help them evaluate suspect IED sites. He said it was a junkyard on the ground and the number of false positives was too high and he didn’t think the ground guys always needed the full motion video feeds they often requested.

The General said that ACC proposes another solution to IEDs. He wants an air centric concept of deployment. He wants the AF to go after the IED network, not the device after it is buried. That means he wants to drop bombs on the bad guys' support network prior to setting the IEDs, and not help our guys find the devices after they are set. While that is a good strategy, what went unstated was that under the new COIN doctrine, that is exactly what our ground troops are tasked. Under COIN the AF has been assigned a primarily support role.

Gen. Keys comments and ideas are typical of the AF mindset. Helping grunts if they find a suspected IED site isn’t sexy because the grunt ground commander is running the show and using the AF only for support. And the AF doesn’t get to make headlines and drop bombs.
Click to expand...

Spoken from someone who has never been deployed to OEF/OIF. Ask any JTAC, who has been to OEF, what he thinks are the three best CAS platforms and I'll bet you my ascot that a USN/USMC airplane won't make it into the list.
 
MAGNUM!! said:
Jeez...FOUR months of not looking at FI and I come back to what? The first thing I see is "F-35" and "Dave Griffin" in the same line. Open the thread and see that nothing has changed.

DG still doesn't know anything about flying airplanes and Navy guys are still disavowing him.

FYI, Dave, there is not a SINGLE USAF pilot who thinks supporting troops on the ground is "beneath" him, and I'm stunned that you misinterpreted Key's remarks. Your expectation bias is showing, and I firmly believe you are being willfully ignorant.

And, Dave, before you squawk about the F-35 and CAS, it might help if you actually wait until the F-35 IOT&E is finished and it's IOC. You actually might be surprised at what you see. Or you can stick your fingers in your ears and chant "Warthog, Warthog, Warthog" til you pass out. Of course, it'll be all those ex-Hog drivers in the F-35, but what do THEY know about CAS, huh?
Click to expand...

MAGNUM!!

I expect that the F-35 as a replacement for the A-10 will be kick-*ss. But some percentage of our future adversaries will focus on using lower technology, less expensive and effective weapons and tactics. Hog drivers are the best of the best, but once the get their expensive F-35s they can only do what their boss lets them do. Hopefully the technology of the F-35 will offset the AF Generals not being committed to putting a mucho expensive F-35 into an A-10 environment.

The AF unquestionably has the best platforms to support the grunts. It is the AF’s core commitment to supporting grunts that I question. The Generals are far more focused on protecting their budgets for what they view are more important strategic goals.

Tell me how you would explain Gen. Key’s comments other than complaining about having to support a non-air centric plan to defeat IEDs? His comments are consistent with the fact that the AF has to be dragged kicking and screaming into a team effort where they only provide support and do not control the show.

Now get out there and get to work. No gym or golf privileges for you until you find me some IEDs.
 
McGillicutty said:
Spoken from someone who has never been deployed to OEF/OIF. Ask any JTAC, who has been to OEF, what he thinks are the three best CAS platforms and I'll bet you my ascot that a USN/USMC airplane won't make it into the list.
Click to expand...

AC130
A10
and....A.......errr.........umm.......
F16?
 
Part of the problem with this whole argument is that Dave has got a grossly oversimplified perspective on CAS. The AF hates CAS? AF pilots don't want to support the grunts? AF Generals hate soldiers? Dumb, dumb, dumb. Ask any AF puke who's done CAS before and as soon as they hear TIC they go into superhero mode. Yes, it's true that some airplanes are better suited to certain things than others, but I guarantee you that each individual in that cockpit or flight deck is working their a** off to save as many US lives and end as many others as they can. To insinuate anything else isn't true for one, and secondly it sidetracks a legitimate discussion. To break it down to ascot wearing, prima donna AF pilots don't want to do CAS (except for A-10 pilots, who for some reason pass the Dave test) simply demonstrates Dave's ignorance and his true agenda. For whatever reason, he just doesn't like us and he's latched on to CAS as a reason for it. Whatever.
 
Deuce130 said:
Part of the problem with this whole argument is that Dave has got a grossly oversimplified perspective on CAS. The AF hates CAS? AF pilots don't want to support the grunts? AF Generals hate soldiers? Dumb, dumb, dumb. Ask any AF puke who's done CAS before and as soon as they hear TIC they go into superhero mode. Yes, it's true that some airplanes are better suited to certain things than others, but I guarantee you that each individual in that cockpit or flight deck is working their a** off to save as many US lives and end as many others as they can. To insinuate anything else isn't true for one, and secondly it sidetracks a legitimate discussion. To break it down to ascot wearing, prima donna AF pilots don't want to do CAS (except for A-10 pilots, who for some reason pass the Dave test) simply demonstrates Dave's ignorance and his true agenda. For whatever reason, he just doesn't like us and he's latched on to CAS as a reason for it. Whatever.
Click to expand...

Deuce 130,

My argument is with the senior leadership of the AF. They perpetuate a culture where supporting grunts plays second fiddle to the true higher calling – an air centric model for all engagements where, due to their self described superior intellect, training and war fighting capabilities, the AF runs the whole show. This is what makes the AF an underperforming team player in the current war. Gen. Key’s remarks regarding the AF’s disdain for how his F-16s and UAVs are used in current IED detection strategy provides clear evidence of this.

While Hogs and Gunships do the best job of anyone supporting the guys on the ground, the senior fighter guys that establish doctrine for fighter CAS don’t do as well. They would much rather be planning to engage the MIG 1.44 or a quadruple digit SAM site. The senior fighter guys’ hearts just aren’t in supporting grunts.

I am hopeful that the F-35 does it better but I am also thankful that the A-10C PE program will re-wing the Hogs, give them similar super powers as F-16s and keep them flying until 2028. A-10 guys won’t mind looking for IEDs.

Maj. Gen. Hagenbeck, USA, issued a stinging critique of AF fighter CAS during Operation Anaconda. http://sill-www.army.mil/famag/2002/SEP_OCT_2002/SEP_OCT_2002_PAGES_5_9.pdf
In the interview he praises A-10s & AC-130s for being particularly effective, Navy and Marine F-18s for flying below minimums (“terrific” he called the F-18s) and then he calls out the AF fighters as mired in poorly planned and executed airspace management that resulted in slow response times of 26 minutes or more from the AF F-16s.

The opinion that AF CAS provided by F-16s is not as good as it should be is not uncommon.

Since you question my biases and motives, to what agenda do you attribute Gen. Hagenbeck’s opinions?
 
Dave Griffin is an ass, that as far as I know has been proven to not even be wearing a trident. I'd be willing to bet he's got more posts on this board than rounds shot down range.
 
DaveGriffin said:
Deuce 130,

My argument is with the senior leadership of the AF. They perpetuate a culture where supporting grunts plays second fiddle to the true higher calling – an air centric model for all engagements where, due to their self described superior intellect, training and war fighting capabilities, the AF runs the whole show. This is what makes the AF an underperforming team player in the current war. Gen. Key’s remarks regarding the AF’s disdain for how his F-16s and UAVs are used in current IED detection strategy provides clear evidence of this.

While Hogs and Gunships do the best job of anyone supporting the guys on the ground, the senior fighter guys that establish doctrine for fighter CAS don’t do as well. They would much rather be planning to engage the MIG 1.44 or a quadruple digit SAM site. The senior fighter guys’ hearts just aren’t in supporting grunts.

I am hopeful that the F-35 does it better but I am also thankful that the A-10C PE program will re-wing the Hogs, give them similar super powers as F-16s and keep them flying until 2028. A-10 guys won’t mind looking for IEDs.

Maj. Gen. Hagenbeck, USA, issued a stinging critique of AF fighter CAS during Operation Anaconda. http://sill-www.army.mil/famag/2002/SEP_OCT_2002/SEP_OCT_2002_PAGES_5_9.pdf
In the interview he praises A-10s & AC-130s for being particularly effective, Navy and Marine F-18s for flying below minimums (“terrific” he called the F-18s) and then he calls out the AF fighters as mired in poorly planned and executed airspace management that resulted in slow response times of 26 minutes or more from the AF F-16s.

The opinion that AF CAS provided by F-16s is not as good as it should be is not uncommon.

Since you question my biases and motives, to what agenda do you attribute Gen. Hagenbeck’s opinions?
Click to expand...

After reading the article, I would surmise the only agenda Gen Hagenbeck has is to improve the way things are done next time. I have zero problem with his statements or his opinions. A valid debrief is one that leads to lessons learned for the next fight. The one thing missing from Gen Hagenbeck's criticisms is the blatant insults, lies, and half-truths that you spew out. You really want a Viper driver to listen to what you have to say? Stop insulting them. Stop lying and accusing. Stop throwing bombs. You'll notice that the General didn't personally attack anyone during the entire interview. Maybe you could learn something from it. Lastly, and I've asked this before, are you really a SEAL? Seen any time in the AOR? Ever been on a DA? Ever worked with an AF ST guy? Ever called in CAS yourself? You've definitely got strong opinons, and I would go even so far as to say you're informed to a certain extent. What's your background that makes you so inflammatory towards AF fighter pilots and Generals? What is it?
 
Deuce130 said:
After reading the article, I would surmise the only agenda Gen Hagenbeck has is to improve the way things are done next time. I have zero problem with his statements or his opinions. A valid debrief is one that leads to lessons learned for the next fight. The one thing missing from Gen Hagenbeck's criticisms is the blatant insults, lies, and half-truths that you spew out. You really want a Viper driver to listen to what you have to say? Stop insulting them. Stop lying and accusing. Stop throwing bombs. You'll notice that the General didn't personally attack anyone during the entire interview. Maybe you could learn something from it. Lastly, and I've asked this before, are you really a SEAL? Seen any time in the AOR? Ever been on a DA? Ever worked with an AF ST guy? Ever called in CAS yourself? You've definitely got strong opinons, and I would go even so far as to say you're informed to a certain extent. What's your background that makes you so inflammatory towards AF fighter pilots and Generals? What is it?
Click to expand...

Deuce - outstanding post. Very good points. Dave, what the hell do you actually do in the military? We're all very interested...
 
This whole thing cracks me up. Dave's presence here in this conversation is as insulting as one of us finding some sort of SEAL / SpecOps board, logging on, and trying to inform them of their failings, telling them how it should "really be done" and pulling statements out of our a$$ in some bizarre attempt to demonstrate our infinte knowledge of their world.

Conclusion: Dave is simply a Troll
Definition of Troll: Anyone who posts crap designed to purely inflame and aggravate; gets chuckles from the reactions of the other members.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Back
Top